"M" wrote in message
oups.com...
Is it common for the approach controller to vector for an ILS at an
altitude below the GS intercept altitude on the IAP? Today is the
third time in the last year or so that Victoria terminal vectored me
for the ILS into BLI at 2000 feet, instead of 2100. I'm very familiar
with the area and I did not bother to question them.

The Canadian controllers provide approach service for Bellingham
probably from an agreement between FAA and NavCanada. Maybe the rules
are somewhat different in Canada, or they just don't have the right
information on this approach?

See http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0604/00045I16.PDF

As has already been pointed out, FAAO 7110.65 5-9-1b requires US controllers
to vector "For a precision approach, at an altitude not above the
glideslope/glidepath or below the minimum glideslope intercept altitude
specified on the approach procedure chart."

So...

What was your assigned altitude prior to receiving the approach clearance?
Above 2100 or level at 2000?

If above 2100, what was the wording of the actual approach clearance? Any
"at or above" or other wording that would allow you to adjust your descent
to intercept the GS at the "altitude specified on the approach chart" rather
than level at 2000?

It could also be as simple as the MVA in that area is 2000 and the
controllers simply assign the round thousands MVA as a routine. They either
don't know or don't care (given the allowable error in altimeters and Mode
C) that they are supposed to add that extra 100ft for ILS approaches.